AMU minority status legal row: A timeline of events
The BJP-led NDA government told the Supreme Court in 2016 that it will withdraw the appeal filed by the erstwhile UPA dispensation against the high court verdict.
Representative Image
NEW DELHI: The Aligarh Muslim University's minority status issue will have to wait to reach a logical end after the Supreme Court majority verdict on Friday asked a regular bench to decide the issue. The prolonged matter, however, has had its fair share of twists and turns, as encapsulated in the following timeline.
* In 1977, the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College was established in Aligarh.
* The imperial legislature passed the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) Act, 1920.
* The AMU Act was amended by the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1951, and AMU (Amendment) Act, 1965.
* A five-judge Constitution bench had in the S Azeez Basha v. Union of India case in 1967 held that since AMU was a central university, it cannot be considered a minority institution.
* In 1981, a two-judge bench of the apex court questioned the correctness of verdict in the Azeez Basha case and referred the matter to a bench of seven judges.
* AMU got back its minority status when Parliament passed the AMU (Amendment) Act in 1981.
* In January 2006, the Allahabad High Court struck down the provision of the 1981 law by which AMU was accorded the minority status. Later, appeals were filed in the Supreme Court challenging the high court verdict.
* In February 2019, a three-judge bench of the apex court referred the matter to a seven-judge bench.
* The BJP-led NDA government told the Supreme Court in 2016 that it will withdraw the appeal filed by the erstwhile UPA dispensation against the high court verdict.
* On January 9, 2024, a seven-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud commenced hearing arguments on the vexed question of minority status of AMU.
* On February 1, 2024, the seven-judge bench reserved its verdict on the issue.
* On November 11, 2024, the seven-judge bench, by a 4:3 minority, overruled the 1967 verdict that said AMU cannot be considered a minority institution since it was created by a central law and said the legal question over AMU's minority status would be adjudicated upon by a regular bench.
